From: Hal Finney (hal@finney.org)
Date: Thu Dec 05 2002 - 23:01:49 MST
mjgeddes writes:
> Well, since you're all such a smart bunch, I thought I'd throw open
> the mystery of the beginning of the universe, and hopefully you guys
> can finally solve it and clear this up for me once and for all
I am partial to the theory that the universe as we know it is a sort of
logical/mathematical structure or object, of the same class as numbers or
logical formulas or computer programs, but immensely more complicated.
We then add to this the principle that numbers and other such objects
have a sort of existence independent of human thought. We don't invent
the numbers, we discover them, and likewise with other such abstract
structures.
So in this theory, all such structures exist in this Platonic sense,
and that would include our universe. There is no meaning to the creation
of the universe, these objects all exist outside of time.
The reason we see our universe as having a beginning is because our kind
of life requires change and evolution. That means that the universe must
be in a low entropy state at one end and high entropy at the other end,
and the direction from low to high entropy is what we call the passage
of time. The dimensionality of the universe - 3 spatial + 1 time, has
been shown in some papers by Max Tegmark to be particularly well suited
to the mix of stability and variability that would seem to allow the
evolution of life.
So by combining the Platonic existence of mathematical objects, the
anthropic principle that we could only observe universes that are suitable
for the formation of life, and some rough arguments that a mathematical
structure with properties similar to those observed in the universe
would be well suited for life, we can put together an explanation for
the existence of the universe. It's obviously pretty hand-wavey at
this point, but so would be any such theory given our present state
of knowledge.
Hal
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jan 15 2003 - 17:58:35 MST